Performance Elements FAQs
Under the Federal employee performance appraisal regulations, performance elements
are work assignments or responsibilities that are used to plan, monitor, and
appraise employee and group performance. A few of the most frequently asked
questions about performance elements include:
?
|
What kinds of performance elements
can agencies use in employee performance plans? |
The regulations specify three types of performance
elements:
- critical elements,
- non-critical elements, and
- additional performance elements.
|
?
|
What is a critical element? |
A critical element is a work assignment or responsibility
of such importance that unacceptable performance on that element would result
in a determination that an employee's overall performance is unacceptable.
The regulations require that employees have at least one critical element
in their performance plans. Critical elements must address performance at
the individual level only. |
?
|
What is a non-critical element
and how can it be used in the performance appraisal process? |
A non-critical element is a dimension or aspect
of individual, team, or organizational performance, exclusive of a critical
element, that is used in assigning a summary level. It may include, but
is not limited to, objectives, goals, program plans, work plans, and other
means of expressing expected performance. Its use is optional but, if used,
it must be expressed as an element and standard, be included in the employee's
performance plan, and be used in assigning a summary level for the rating
of record. However, a non-critical element cannot be used as a basis for
taking a performance-based action. Other features of non-critical elements
include:
- non-critical elements cannot be used in two-level appraisal programs
(i.e., pass/fail);
- non-critical elements can be given more weight than critical elements
when assigning a summary level above Unacceptable (Level 1); and
- while a non-critical element must have a performance standard written
for at least one level, the written standard need not describe the Fully
Successful or equivalent level.
|
?
|
Can an agency appraisal program
provide for appraising non-critical elements at the Unacceptable level? |
Yes. Writing a performance standard for a non-critical
element at the Fully Successful level and appraising that element at only
two levels (e.g., Fully Successful and Unacceptable) has been done for some
time and results in an employee being appraised as Unacceptable for that
element. When a non-critical element is appraised at the Unacceptable level,
it usually causes the summary rating of record to be lowered from what appraisal
on only the critical elements would merit. However, a non-critical element
appraised at the Unacceptable level can not lower the summary level to Level
1 or be the basis for a performance-based action under parts 432 or 752
of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations. Also, the Office of Personnel Management
encourages agencies to change the focus of their non-critical elements to
more effectively use them to set goals and results-measures that distinguish
among higher levels of performance above Fully Successful or equivalent. |
?
|
Why can't a pass/fail appraisal
program use non-critical elements? |
A non-critical element, by definition, must be
used in assigning a summary level and in the application of a Pass/Fail
summary program, this cannot be done. The reason it cannot is because the
only way a Level 1 summary can be assigned is when performance on a critical
element is Unacceptable, no matter what the performance on any non-critical
element. Therefore, pass/fail appraisal and non-critical elements cannot
be used together. |
?
|
What is an additional performance
element? |
Additional performance elements provide agencies
another tool for communicating performance expectations important to the
organization. In essence, they are dimensions or aspects of overall performance
that the agency wishes to communicate and appraise, but which will not be
used in assigning a summary level. Such additional elements may include
objectives, goals, program plans, work plans, and other methods of expressing
expected performance. Like non-critical elements, they do not have to be
appraised at any particular level. Their major distinctions from non-critical
elements are that they can not be used in assigning a summary level and
additional performance elements do not require a performance standard. They
allow agencies to factor group or team performance into the performance
plan of employees under two-level (Pass/Fail) summary appraisal programs. |
?
|
If additional performance elements
are not used in assigning a summary level, what purpose do they serve? |
Additional performance elements allow employee
performance plans to communicate a fuller picture of the performance that
is expected. This can be particularly important in two-level (Pass/Fail)
summary level programs, which may only use critical elements that appraise
individual-level or individually-controllable performance to assign a summary
level. By using additional performance elements to set expectations for
and appraise group and organizational goals and results, an agency can answer
many of the criticisms of the Pass/Fail approach, the most common of which
concern its apparent focus on mediocre performance and failure to emphasize
and reward excellence.
The inclusion of additional performance elements encourages a dialogue
among supervisors, employees, and peers that might not have taken place
if they had not been included in a performance plan or goal statement.
An agency could include items that employees are not ready to have affect
their ratings of record, but which may be used in the future as non-critical
elements. One example would be appraising "team interaction"
in a group that has not had sufficient time or experience with such concepts
and behaviors. Because no standard is required, additional performance
elements also might be appropriate when the organization has not decided
what measurements are valid or who is the most credible rater(s).
Lastly, assessments on additional performance elements that make distinctions
above the Fully Successful or equivalent level may be used as the basis
for granting awards. Such a use of additional performance elements is
a perfectly reasonable way to meet the legal requirement at section 4302(a)(3)
of title 5, United States Code, to "use the results of performance
appraisals as a basis for rewarding employees."
|
?
|
Can an additional performance
element include individual performance? |
Yes. Additional performance elements (e.g., stretch
goals, extra credit for special projects, published customer service standards)
can address individual or group performance, whichever is the most appropriate
to the agency's mission, goals, and culture. |
?
|
Since they can't affect the
summary level, can an agency use additional performance elements instead
of non-critical elements in a Pass/Fail program? |
Yes. Within a Pass/Fail summary program, additional
performance elements can be used in ways otherwise usually associated with
non-critical elements. |
?
|
Can an agency appraise an element
at a performance level more than one level from the level at which a standard
is established? |
Yes, provided the agency program provides for
such levels to be assigned. That is, an element cannot be appraised at Outstanding
based on a standard established at the Fully Successful level if the applicable
program only provides for appraising elements at Unacceptable and Fully
Successful. |
Frequently Asked Questions